2 hours ago, transam said:

 

 

Things have changed a tad since then though...????

Have they?I applied to emigrate to Australia and was asked if I had a criminal record,it's obviously still a requirement.

Anyone know the difference between the word "Slave" and the word "Indentured Servant"?

Just been told off on another site,  for using the word Slave, in relation to the Irish people being captured and shipped overseas. But in the books and Folklore they use the word Slaves when talking about the Irish and the Vikings,, But it seems the words "Indentured Servants" should be used for these folk. Is this a word we should now use for all these black "Slaves "  
Got to admit, it makes it sound so much better 

 

27 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Nope, that was just one part, it was actually also compensation for killings, descendants were to get a payment. That is what Jamaicans are after.

 

Whether the perpetrators are still alive is not really relevant, many of the perpetrators of German crimes had died by the time the settelements were finalised, many of the victims had died, that did not stop their descendants from making claims on Germany's taxpayers. Successfully.

They would need to ask the people who enslaved them, which would have been their fellow Countrymen or neighbors .

29 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Whether the perpetrators are still alive is not really relevant,

It is, people who are alive can go though the courts of law , dead people cannot do that

2 hours ago, transam said:

Back then us British sent their own to Australia for stealing a loaf of bread, or even hanged them, press gangs lifted drunks off the streets and threw them aboard ships to be away for months on end.

Sailors were keel hauled for being naughty too. Occupied gallows were at crossroads to warn naughty folk of their possible demise. Folk were even put on the "Rack" to be stretched, pull their bones out of their sockets, hung drawn and quartered whilst still alive even..

 

Things have changed a tad since then though...????

Ah the Good Ole Days!

Everyone wants to complain and say that their relatives were a Kunta Kinte and you better say sorry and pay up. Slavery still goes on. Even here!

Weak attempt to cash in on the BLM hysteria.

 

Nice try guys ????. Now, jog on son...

Oh, as an afterthought, didn't 300,000 plus guys die on the union side in the ACW opposing slavery. Bit strange this never gets mentioned.

The times they are a changing

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jun/19/houses-of-parliament-art-has-a-lot-of-racist-history-says-its-curator?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

This apology thing that is going on, is just so much BS, so false and pitiful.  The British Government  has no right to apologise on my behalf for something that happened 250 years ago and that has absolutely nothing to do with me.  Not only that, but they are apologising to people who themselves were not to be born for 250 years after the fact.  Learn from history sure, regret it ever happened sure, make sure it doesn't happen again, definitely, but stop apologising for something none of us alive had anything to do with. Where does it stop,  do we apologise for the Battle of Culloden, or for bringing Measles to Japan in the 1600s? Is someone going to pay out to me because my Great Grandparents were forced out of Russia in the 1800? I doubt that.  Regret bad history in your own thoughts and heart, but stop all this BS genuflecting and clasped hands apologising for something that happened in the history books.  

Some off topic posts and the replies have been removed. 

The workers choose to get on the ships and were given a wage and housing.  The slave owners didn't see any point in harming the workers.  Some of them moved as families.

 

The work on the plantations was seen as better than back in their own country.

 

Ironically with the abolishment of slavery many of them continued working by choice.  Some returned home.

 

The boat trip from India took about 3 months and some died on the ship of disease.  Not because they were beaten.

 

British colonization was a good thing.

There has to a point at which claims against  acts in  historical past  be denied but  noted as significant  of the injustices as a reference point which can be used  to eliminate  the need for ongoing accusations, guilt , and denial and instead to  agree  to the elimination  of any future  continuance of abuses based on assumed right of racial or cultural superiority.

 

 

3 hours ago, worgeordie said:

Saying sorry on a bended knee is all we can offer,

bent knee? 

 

What's after that, baubles and trinkets in 2020?

Sheer genius on the part of Lloyds of London, et al.

 

Keep 'em so focused on the sins from 10 generations ago that we completely miss the fact that the Banksters are still robbing all of us blind to this day.

 

1 hour ago, CorpusChristie said:

It is, people who are alive can go though the courts of law , dead people cannot do that

Firstly, it doesn't necessarily go through courts. It's negotiations between state and victim organizations.

 

Second, the dead people's descendants are perfectly able to claim, this is what happened at the Jewish material claims conference. Of course many of the victims were dead and gone. Their descendants however received compensation.

1 hour ago, faraday said:

Right then, let's go back to Roman times when they enslaved the British people, & we can get a few quid.

Just to be clear I think reparations are wrong in principle. However, from a legal perspective if the actual victim is dead is no bar to compensation.

 

Indeed the reparation claim from Italians would take the whole concept ad absurdum because remoteness has to kick in somewhere. The 19th century is probably too early for that. Roman times is not.

Sorry, not sorry. Africa’s civilization was centuries behind. Sorry for not be innovative? Sorry for what?

4 hours ago, worgeordie said:

If they are looking for money, Saying sorry on a bended knee is all we can offer,

as i think the UK has run out of money, due to the Government paying Millions

of workers for doing nothing.

regards worgeordie

 

           Civil servants , come to mind ..

The UK provides  approximately £14 billion+ in foreign aid with about , £250 million landing in the coffers of Carribean states. This does not include the financial benefits of preferred trading status and waivers of tariffs and duties.  These states already receive generous handouts every year.

 

The money these states, must come from somewhere, right? Someone in the UK must pay for this additional largesse. One way of financing the  demand for payment would be to add a destination tax on UK travelers. Add a tax of £10 a day and the  tourists will bring in the money these people seek. It will also negatively impact tourism, but such is life. Again, the money must come from someone.

 

And while they are at,  have these immigrants decided on the compensation that will be paid to the locals and natives who were slaughtered and displaced with the arrival of the Africans and Europeans? I notice that these folks do not address the Arawaks and Caribe  original inhabitants. Shouldn't these socially aware  Caribbean folk be addressing the ongoing injustice and agree to return the lands and to pay compensation or at least rent? 

 

 

7 hours ago, transam said:

So do we pursue the Romans, Normans, Germans for financial closure regarding their atrocities...?

Let’s see the Roman Empire was overrun and Rome itself sacked and pillaged, leading to the destruction of most of the institutions that profited from slavery but good luck with your campaign to hold those institutions culpable. Which ones are you thinking of in particular?

 

The Normans, well as many of the uks aristocratic families are descendants of these invaders, I whole heartedly support bankrupting them into poverty to atone. Count me in on that campaign. 

6 hours ago, jvs said:

I know of one who became president of the USA.

Correct,and then everything became fantastic for black folks in the USA,oh wait,no it didn`t it got worse.

11 hours ago, bannork said:

 The Briti didn't want the Romans to leave, they knew what the Viking hordes would do to them once the Romans had gone.

 

Then surely Italy, as the geographical descendants of the Romans, should pay for the damage which the Vikings caused. Maybe they can persuade the Danes and Norwegians to chip in...

13 hours ago, transam said:

So do we pursue the Romans, Normans, Germans for financial closure regarding their atrocities...?

don't forget the vikings

13 hours ago, bannork said:

 The Briti didn't want the Romans to leave, they knew what the Viking hordes would do to them once the Romans had gone.

 

The Roman Empire's rule over Britain lasted until around 410 AD, the first recorded Viking raid was 793 AD.  The Angles, Saxons and Jutes stepped in to provide the necessary hordes during that period.

Those Druids were really good at seeing the future.

9 hours ago, geriatrickid said:

The UK provides  approximately £14 billion+ in foreign aid with about , £250 million landing in the coffers of Carribean states. This does not include the financial benefits of preferred trading status and waivers of tariffs and duties.  These states already receive generous handouts every year.

 

The money these states, must come from somewhere, right? Someone in the UK must pay for this additional largesse. One way of financing the  demand for payment would be to add a destination tax on UK travelers. Add a tax of £10 a day and the  tourists will bring in the money these people seek. It will also negatively impact tourism, but such is life. Again, the money must come from someone.

 

And while they are at,  have these immigrants decided on the compensation that will be paid to the locals and natives who were slaughtered and displaced with the arrival of the Africans and Europeans? I notice that these folks do not address the Arawaks and Caribe  original inhabitants. Shouldn't these socially aware  Caribbean folk be addressing the ongoing injustice and agree to return the lands and to pay compensation or at least rent? 

 

 

It's 15 billion Pounds now, but of course one third of that goes to the UN and other multilateral organizations, while the rest is spread over many countries so each only gets millions. Not billions.

 

As for the Caribs, obviously they were not displaced by the current inhabitants of the Caribbean, whose ancestors were themselves brought against their will to the Caribbean as slaves. Rather the Caribs were displaced by the usual colonial pirates, thieves and exploiters, the Spanish, Dutch, French and British. So if anyone would compensate the Caribs, it would again be these nations.

 

However, remoteness has to kick in at some point and the period of Carib displacement is too long ago. The 19th century probably is not.

6 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

Let’s see the Roman Empire was overrun and Rome itself sacked and pillaged, leading to the destruction of most of the institutions that profited from slavery but good luck with your campaign to hold those institutions culpable. Which ones are you thinking of in particular?

 

The Normans, well as many of the uks aristocratic families are descendants of these invaders, I whole heartedly support bankrupting them into poverty to atone. Count me in on that campaign. 

You missed out the German government of the day, you know, the government that rounded up 6,000,000 people and executed them, plus their purge for stardom killed tens of millions. Why no comment...?

personally this whole rewriting of history has gone awry.slavery has been with us from the first instance we became agricultural societies perhaps before that,its not colour based and the arabs were first into the african slave trade and last out,slavery wasnt deleted from the statute book in arabia till the 1960s,ottoman turk slave mkts the largest in the world in modern times.african chiefs sold their own people.if we go back further it was common in europe till the early middle ages. as mentioned greece rome egypt persia zulu ashanti china empires all practised it and many more.mostly all in real truth.let he without sin caste the 1st stone!umm not much flying about in all honesty.we cant pick on one single aspect of the slave trade,the atlantic but not african/arab one or mediterranean one as that itself is an expression of racism.we all need to look in the mirror learn something and move on -african arab european and oriental.its getting sordid now as low lifes scramable in the dust for coin.very marcus garvey like or jacob and  the pieces of silver.

The president of United States mentioned I assume is Obama. His father was from Kenya and were not shipped across the Atlantic as slaves. Considering his mother was white, he could have been classed as white or black, a 50-50 thing.

Yes, Africans war lords etc were involved in capturing slaves for the trade. And slavery was there before Europeans came & they were "spoils" of war. The trade made "wars" very profitable. Europeans gave just enough weapons to facilitate round ups, but not enough to throw out the white traders. Think supply and demand. Slaves were in demand more than cocoa.

Think of drug cartels: they wouldn't pervert and destroy local governments, engage in killings & terror if it weren't for the demand from users and the money that flows from users to enable the cartels. Slavery would have remained a relatively small side  'benefit" of war just the same as coke leaves were a local stimulant until demand distorted market beyond recognition.

Maybe reparations for Caribbean nations could be found from N African nations that enslaved more than 1 million Europeans (based on religion, not race) back in 18th century. Collect it and pass it on. "... to the shores of Tripoli" in US Marine hymn was talking about going to a Sandals resort.

Hey! We gave them cricket. What more do they want?

????